The examination of how words are learned can offer valuable insights into the nature of lexical representations. For example, a common assessment of novel word learning is based on its ability to interfere with other words; given that words are known to compete with each other, we can use the capacity of a novel word to interfere with the activation of other lexical representations as a measure of the degree to which it is integrated into the mental lexicon. This measure (...) allows us to assess novel word learning in L1 or L2, but also the degree to which representations from the two lexica interact with each other. Despite the somewhat independent lines of research on L1 and L2 word learning, common patterns emerge across the two literatures. In both cases, lexicalization appears to follow a similar trajectory. In L1, newly encoded words often fail at first to engage in competition with known words, but they do so later, after they have been better integrated into the mental lexicon. Similarly, L2 words generally have a facilitatory effect, which can, however, become inhibitory in the case of more robust lexical representations. Despite the similar pattern, L1 lexicalization is described in terms of inter-lexical connections, leading to more automatic processing ; whereas in L2 word learning, lack of lexical inhibition is attributed to less robust L2 lexical representations. Here, I point to these similarities and I use them to argue that a common mechanism may underlie similar patterns across the two literatures. (shrink)

Processes governing the creation, perception and production of spoken words are sensitive to the patterns of speech sounds in the language user’s lexicon. Generative linguistic theory suggests that listeners infer constraints on possible sound patterning from the lexicon and apply these constraints to all aspects of word use. In contrast, emergentist accounts suggest that these phonotactic constraints are a product of interactive associative mapping with items in the lexicon. To determine the degree to which phonotactic constraints are lexically mediated, we (...) observed the effects of learning new words that violate English phonotactic constraints on phonotactic perceptual repair processes in nonword consonant-consonant-vowel stimuli. Subjects who learned such words were less likely to “repair” illegal onset clusters and report them as legal ones. Effective connectivity analyses of MRI-constrained reconstructions of simultaneously collected magnetoencephalography and EEG data showed that these behavioral shifts were accompanied by changes in the strength of influences of lexical areas on acoustic-phonetic areas. These results strengthen the interpretation of previous results suggesting that phonotactic constraints on perception are produced by top-down lexical influences on speech processing. (shrink)

Previous research on associative learning has uncovered detailed aspects of the process, including what types of things are learned, how they are learned, and where in the brain such learning occurs. However, perceptual processes, such as stimulus recognition and identification, take time to unfold. Previous studies of learning have not addressed when, during the course of these dynamic recognition processes, learned representations are formed and updated. If learned representations are formed and updated while recognition is ongoing, the result of learning (...) may incorporate spurious, partial information. For example, during word recognition, words take time to be identified, and competing words are often active in parallel. If learning proceeds before this competition resolves, representations may be influenced by the preliminary activations present at the time of learning. In three experiments using word learning as a model domain, we provide evidence that learning reflects the ongoing dynamics of auditory and visual processing during a learning event. These results show that learning can occur before stimulus recognition processes are complete; learning does not wait for ongoing perceptual processing to complete. (shrink)